then, Now, be (Mr. S.,) would say that the
gentleman had admitted the reporter had not re-
ported his speeches in full, but that he, (Mr. C.,)
had written them out.
Mr. CHAMBERS thought he had distinctly sta-
ted the fact.
The reporter had said to him, he as not by
profession a lawyer-that he did not feel compe-
tent to condense a legal argument, into one-fifth
of its natural dimensions, and that any attempt
to do so would do injustice to the argument as
delivered. This was no fault of the reporter,
nor did it imply, what he, (Mr. C.,) had not said,
that the reporter put language into his mouth, as
the gentleman has phrased it. The habits and
pursuits of teh reporter did not enable him to dis-
tinguish the nice and important points of law
involved in the argument, so as to make a per-
fect and complete syllabus, or digest of a long
and elaborate constitutional argument. The
gentleman must surely comprehend this, and per-
ceive how utterly impossible it was. He, there-
fore, found it necessary to revise and correct the
reporter's notes, so as to make them accord with
the meaning he designed to convey. He hoped
he was now understood by the gentleman and
every one else.
Mr. STEWART, of Caroline, said:
He understood the gentleman clearly, and he,
(Mr. S.,) was not throwing any imputation upon
the reporter, because the gentleman had said he
had been reported as saying absurd things.
Now, he, (Mr. S.,) would ask, if that was a
compliment to the reporter to charge him with
having reported the gentleman as saying absurd
things, and such as he never intended to say?
Now, what he asked, did the committee them-
selves say?
"The only departure which is brought to the
notice of the committee from the terms of the
original contract has occurred in some reports
of speeches by the members themselves, which
extended beyond the aketches of debates as ex-
pressed in the terms of the contract, whereby the
extent and expense of said dabates have teen greatly
increased."
The reporter gets paid for all these long
speeches, that he never reported, and without
this departure, the four thousand dollars would
have been ample for the reporting of the sketches
for two months to come.
Now, the gentleman from Kent, [Mr. Cham-
bers,] also made an argument to the effect, that
his, [Mr. S's,] friend, [Mr. Thawley,] had said
that this Conventian had got more work than it
had agreed to pay for. Mr. Wheeler had said,
that by the fifth of April, the appropriation would
be entirely exhausted.
Now, he had enough to pay him up to the fifth
of April, and if the Convention had the debates
up to this time, it would be a just estimate.
There was one thing he desired to refer to in re-
ply to the remarks of the gentleman from Prince
George's, (Mr. Bowie.) The gentleman had
referred the Convention to the debates in the
Virginia Convention, and he, [Mr. Stewart,]
found that when he got them they, were report- |
ed up to within two or three days of their last
proceedings.
Now, what did Mr. Wheeler say, "that the
debates are not allowed to accumulate for forty-
eight hours on the hands of the reporter," and
vet we did not get them printed until three or
four weeks after they have been delivered. Had
he known that they were to be kept so long wait-
ing for them, he would never have voted for a
reporter.
He would say, that he would rather have paid
$20,000 for the debates to have been furnished
the following day, after their delivery, than to
have given $4,000, and then have to wait weeks
for them. It had not been a rule of action of
his life to purchase cheap things, because they
almost always turned out in the end, to be the
most expensive. Be sure that a thing is needed
and then buy it of the best quality. There was
an illustration of the fallacy of buying cheap
things in the present case.
He had been willing to pay him a proper com-
pensation, and if the Convention had been dispos-
ed to have paid Mr. Wheeler a sufficient sum at
first, to have enabled him to obtain accurate re-
porters, we should not have heard the outcry that
had been made.
He would vote for the reconsideration; but, as
he had said before, he would like to know from
the chairman of the committee whether there
were any persons ready to give bonds for the re-
porting and printing of the whole of the debates
for $6,500, and if so, why they were not em-
ployed'
Mr. HOWARD moved the previous question, but
withdrew it at the request of
Mr. STEWART, of Baltimore city, who laid, he
would simply call the attention of the gentleman
from Allegany, [Mr. Smith,] to the fact that the
contract was taken from the committee by the
Convention, after it had been submitted to the
Convention and approved. He had intended to
make some other remarks, but he did not wish to
trespass upon the time and patience of the Con-
vention.
Mr. SMITH interposed and said:
That if the gentleman, (Mr. Stewart, of Balti-
more city,) would permit him, he would explain.
He, (Mr. S.) had the contract before him. He
saw that certain duties were to be performed, and
he believed the duty of seeing the contract prop-
erly carried out, devolved upon the committee.
Mr. STEWART, of Baltimore city, remarked,
that it was the duty of the reporter to have con-
fined himself to the agreement.
Mr. SMITH said:
That the gentleman knew that the debates
had been more extended within the last few
weeks, and it was his duty to have interposed
with the reporter.
Mr. STEWART, of Baltimore, replied that the
gentleman supposed that he, [Mr. S.,] knew, but
he did not know, in his official character, whether
the reporter was furnishing sketches or full de-
bates. It was a matter of calculation upon the
vouchers submitted by the reporter, and upon
I that he had granted his warrant, as chairman of |
